Thank you for your email setting out, amongst other things, various articles about things that you have written about and which I had not expected.

Thank you for that.

Thank you that you have given me the opportunity to form a view and build a relationship with your company that has instructed, in turn, I must presume, a marketing company to send out your email setting out, amongst other things, various articles about things that you have written about and which I had not expected. Or requested.

If I had not received your email then I would not have known about your company, not least because I am in Bath, over 200 miles away.

Still, your marketing people will know better about that and no doubt there are all kinds of reasons why it was a good idea to send me this email, and charge you for it, setting out, amongst other things, various articles about things that you have written about and which I had not expected. Or requested. Or desired.

Now that I come to read as far as the second paragraph I see that your newsletter has a typographical error within it. We’ll let that go.

And I am left confused.

Why is it a good idea for your company to pay marketing agents to send out emails to people that have neither requested nor desired them living more than 200 miles away?

Of course, I am a solicitor and solicitors use your services.

I get that.

Divorce solicitors do not though. What? Your marketeers checked that out didn’t they? I mean, they do target this stuff don’t they or do they just send it out in a scattergun fashion? And if so, why would you pay someone to do that?

I’m wondering at the end of all of this, and I’m sorry if it has wasted your time, but was your email spam and how much do you pay your marketeers to send this stuff out in your company’s name to people who neither want it or could have any reasonable interest in it?

Furthermore, the email says that I signed up for this (and I find this really hard to believe) through one of your companies websites.

Go on I’ll bite.

Which one?

I wish you all the very best with your marketing activities but please make sure that I am not spammed in this way again.

2 responses to “The Futile Fightback Against Spam Begins Here”

I am pretty chilled about spam as long as I can unsubscribe from it, then no big deal. Everyone I meet I chuck into my weekly RSS feed but I am very clear about options to unsubscribe.

Interestingly I have had a running feud with Adobe for years who despite my attempts to unsubscribe still fail to do so. This is where I have a problem. I have asked for it to stop but it continues. Adobe (if it is them) should no better cos it is harming their brand.

Apps like MailChimp, that I use, are very rigid on this…to protect their brand.

I very rarely get ‘unsubscribes.’ I would like to think that is down to the superb content I provide but it is far more simple than that I suspect…delete.

So my view is that I don’t mind spam, takes a few seconds to sense check it, read, park, delete or unsubscribe. I think the price we pay for rich accessible and relevant content is a lot of poor delete-able stuff. I dont mind that balance.

Take Twitter for example, it is just one big spam fest with numerous people (me included) constantly launching their data howitzers into other peoples timelines.

Anyhow two clicks and it’s gone, for now, or forever. What maters is not the spam but how we can control it.

there is a difference between spam email and Twitter. Twitter is elective. I elect when I access my timeline and how far back I revise it. You can spam my twitterstream alll you like. When you do so there is an implicit acceptance on the Twittering party’s part that their tweet may never been seen at all.

With email, one pushes the spam right onto someone’s e-plate.

Fine, I can remove it, and I can ask that particular Spam Waiter not to visit my table again, but my meal has already been interrupted. And there is an endless cue of other spam waiters queuing up waiting to interrupt.